Posts Tagged ‘James Holmes’

ABC Continues Its Leftist Propagandist Hack Ways With Its Biased Distortion Of News And Its Sloppy Journalism

July 26, 2012

A Nexis database search reveals that there are at least 18 individuals in the Aurora, Colorado area named “James Holmes.” Yet Brian Ross managed to pick out just one of these 18 to cite—the one who is a member of the Tea Party—without first checking to see if this was the same person as the shooter.

What are the odds of that?

You need to understand: ABC didn’t google “James Holmes Aurora”; they googled “James Holmes Aurora tea party”.  They NEVER would have googled “James Holmes Democrat” or “James Holmes OWS” and ran with that connection if one turned up (there actually WAS a registered Democrat named “James Holmes,” for what it’s worth).

The dishonesty of the media is beyond parallel unless you go to Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia. 

Was the error corrected?  Yeah, and it didn’t even take that long, thanks to the fact that today, unlike in the fairly recent past, we’ve got Fox News and we’ve got a lot of dedicated bloggers who at least try to correct the avalanche of lies the mainstream media tells in the guise of “reporting.”  But this is like the sixth time the mainstream media has falsely charged the Tea Party with some awful crime.  And they know how the game works: it doesn’t matter if the story is true and it doesn’t matter if the story has to be “corrected”; what matters is that over and over and over the media insinuates that the tea party is somehow “dangerous” and the fecal matter that they keep throwing at it sticks in the public perception. That question by the falsely accused, slandered man, “Which office do I go to get my reputation back?” is what the press is banking on.  Because part of the infamous “Big Lie” strategy was to tar their targets with such a climate of doubt that, even if each individual accusation proved to be untrue, the professional propagandists knew that the sheer weight of negative attack would ultimately culminate in affecting the perception of the people.

Shameful, ABC NEWS (Brian Ross & Stephanopoulos) Do No Investigative Journalism But a Google Search, But Jump to Conclusion that Datk Night Shooter James Holmes Linked to Colorado Tea Party Patriots … Never Contacted Tea Party, Gets it Wrong, ABC News Backtracks & Apologizes

SHAMEFUL, SIMPLY SHAMEFUL BUT WE HAVE BECOME ACCUSTOMED TO IT FROM THE LIBERAL, BIAS MSM …

Exactly what part about investigative journalism do Brian Ross and George Stephanopoulos not understand? The liberal lame stream media was so quick to jump to a conclusion that James Holmes, the ‘Dark Night’ shooter who killed 12 movie go’ers last night and injured 70 while going on his shooting rampage in Aurora, Colorado. So if ABC News did not know it was the same Jim Holmes and did not try to confirm it, why would they have reported it? Can you say liberal irresponsible journalism?

 

ABC News has suggested that James Holmes — the suspect in today’s shooting in Aurora, Colorado — may have a connection to the Tea Party.

ABC’s Brian Ross reported this morning that there is “a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado, page on the Colorado Tea party site… talking about him joining the Tea Party last year.”

“Now, we don’t know if this is the same Jim Holmes,” Ross cautioned “but it’s Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado.”

Great investigative journalism ABC, how difficult could it really have been to have called the the Colorado Tea Party to confirm that it was the same Jim Holmes? But no, you media hacks were salivating and wanted to believe it was a Tea Party member so that you could rail against them. Do you people have any conscience? Obviously you have no journalistic integrity. This is the extent of ABC News investigation, a google search that got them the following web page. Not one call or email to the Colorado Tea Party Patriots to confirm that it was the same individual. Nope, no second source by ABC, they just went to the accusation hoping they were correct. As stated at Breitbart.com. what else would we expect from a corrupt media complex with a political agenda?

On Good Morning America, ABC News’ Brian Ross and George Stephanopoulos suggested that the Tea Party might be connected to the mass shootings early this morning in an Aurora, CO theater during a screening of the new Batman movie, The Dark Knight Rises. The mainstream media attempted to blame the Tea Party for the Tuscon shootings in January 2011, shortly after Republicans swept the midterm elections. Now, in the critical 2012 elections, the mainstream media seems poised to do the same–and ABC News has led the way.

Here is the exchange between Brian Ross and George Stephanolpoulos:

Stephanolpoulos: I’m going to go to Brian Ross. You’ve been investigating the background of Jim Holmes here. You found something that might be significant.

Ross: There’s a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado, page on the Colorado Tea party site as well, talking about him joining the Tea Party last year. Now, we don’t know if this is the same Jim Holmes. But it’s Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado.

Stephanolpoulos: Okay, we’ll keep looking at that. Brian Ross, thanks very much.

So what was the result of ABC’s irresponsible journalism … they made 54 year old Jim Holme’s life a living hell. They never once attempted to contact him on his web page to see if they had the wrong person. That would have been too much effort. Why know they truth when you can smear the Tea Party?

What kind of idiot makes that kind of statement?” Holmes told TheDC. “Really, seriously, how do we take a journalist seriously when it’s pretty clear they really haven’t done any sort of check on their facts?”

Holmes has the unfortunate coincidence of sharing a similar name with James Holmes, the 24-year-old accused of going on a rampage during a midnight showing of the “Dark Knight Rises” in Aurora, Colo., early Friday morning.

Because of this, ABC News reporter Brian Ross, appearing on “Good Morning America” on Friday, suggested the suspect could be a member of the tea party, citing the fact that “there’s a Jim Holmes of Aurora, Colorado, page on the Colorado Tea Party site.”

But Ross had the wrong guy: The tea partier he was referring to is this 52-year-old former law enforcement officer. ABC News was forced to apologize online.

Holmes told TheDC that ABC News didn’t call him before going to air and he still hasn’t heard from them or received a direct apology. “No, not a thing,” he said.

ABC News would later apologize for their rush to judgement and poor reporting. However, their initial apology was hardly one at all. ABC News stated, tried to spread the blame around to “social media” and “members of the public”.

An earlier ABC News broadcast report suggested that a Jim Holmes of a Colorado Tea Party organization might be the suspect, but that report was incorrect. Several other local residents with similar names were also contacted via social media by members of the public who mistook them for the suspect.

Wait, after the firestorm from their screw up, ABC finally admits their fault of outing the wrong Jim Holmes and that they never vetted the story. It’s not that you failed to vet a story, you creating journalistic malpractice.

Editor’s Note: An earlier ABC News broadcast report suggested that a Jim Holmes of a Colorado Tea Party organization might be the suspect, but that report was incorrect. ABC News and Brian Ross apologize for the mistake, and for disseminating that information before it was properly vetted.

Wanna see what happens when you use ABC’s Brian Ross methodology of investigative journalism? From Glenn Beck come brilliant satire … Why does ABC New have employed an individual arrested for murder and sending sexually explicit photos and tests to teen girls? Hmm?

Charge one: Chris Davis was brutally killed and murdered he was found facedown in his pool. Brian Ross has been arrested for the killing of Chris Davis

Charge Two: Brian Ross sent explicit photos and text messages to two teenage girls

I looked the last two charges up.  It’s true.  Brian Ross really DID send explicit photos and text messages to two teenage girls:

FONTANA: Random texter asked little girls for photos and sex, police say
BY RICHARD BROOKS The Press Enterprise STAFF WRITER
Published: 19 March 2012 11:46 AM

Explicit photos and text messages to two girls has landed a 37-year-old Mentone man in jail on suspicion of sex-related charges, according to Fontana police and jail records.

Brian John Ross was arrested at 5:35 p.m. Thursday at Sierra and Merrill avenues in Fontana and booked on suspicion of contacting a minor and arranging to meet with a minor via the Internet for the purpose of having sex, jail records show. His bail is $50,000.

On March 13, a 10-year-old Fontana girl received a text message from a man who would later identify himself as a 38-year-old named “Brian,” police said in a written statement.

Brian sent the girl a face shot along with a photo of himself exposed, according to the statement.

“Brian asked (the girl) to send him pictures of herself,” according to the statement.

Similar text messages were sent to the girl’s 13-year-old cousin from Redlands.

And, yes, it seems that it Brian Ross is not just a child molester, but a murderer:

5 arrested in connection with St. Albans pool death
Posted: Jun 28, 2012 8:02 AM PDT Updated: Jul 01, 2012 2:01 PM PDT
By Matt Henson

ST. ALBANS, Vt. – Thursday morning, St. Albans Police started rounding up suspects in the death of Christopher Davis, 22.

“Chris grew up with all of these people, they were friends his whole life, he trusted them,” said Samanthajo Assisi, Davis’ girlfriend.

Police say on March 21, Travis Bugbee and Brian Ross, both 23, of St. Albans, lured Davis to the city swimming pool in a plot to rob him. When Davis arrived, the two men allegedly kicked and beat him, took Davis’ money, drugs and other items he was carrying.

“He might have owed people some money for drugs, not these people, and that might be common knowledge,” St. Albans Police Chief Gary Taylor said.

Davis’ body was found in the pool a few weeks later.

ABC’s Brian Ross ought to be fired – either for being a murderous child molester or maybe just for being a sloppy propagandist posing as a “journalist.”  George Stephanopoulos – who began his career as a Democrat media spinmeister – ought to be fired for his key participation in Brian Ross’ “journalism.”

There have been at least 7,379 Occupy arrests (see also here).  Versus basically ZERO for the Tea Party.  And yet the media long ago “decided” that the Tea Party was dangerous and the Occupy Wall Street movement was NOT dangerous out of their leftist propagandist bias.

“ABC News” is an oxymoron.

Obama’s ‘What I Said Was That We Need To Stand Behind Businesses’ Strangely Different From His Actual Words: ‘If You’ve Got A Business, You Didn’t Build That’

July 26, 2012

Obama’s having a problem: he is kicking his very own ass.  He keeps talking and talking and he can’t shut up.

He’s now trying to do everything he can to scrub the factual record and say that he didn’t say what he actually very clearly said.

His latest foot-in-mouth disease moment should put the kibosh on this Marxist ever coming close to a second term – with the now famous words:

There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me — because they want to give something back. They know they didn’t — look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there. (Applause.)

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

We’re now being told that Obama was referring not to businesses, silly, but to roads and bridges.

But a basic understanding of the English language pretty much rules that out:

The [Obama] Team then explains: “The President’s full remarks show that the ‘that’ in ‘you didn’t build that’ clearly refers to roads and bridges–public infrastructure we count on the government to build and maintain.”

That’s bunk, and not only because “business” is more proximate to the pronoun “that” and therefore its more likely antecedent. The Truth Team’s interpretation is ungrammatical. “Roads and bridges” is plural; “that” is singular. If the Team is right about Obama’s meaning, he should have said, “You didn’t build those.”

Barack Obama is supposed to be the World’s Greatest Orator, the smartest man in the world. Yet his campaign asks us to believe he is not even competent to construct a sentence.

So let’s examine this thing we call our language and see how it actually works:

“If you’ve got a business (singular), you didn’t build THAT (singular).”

Which of course is what Obama very clearly said. Because yes, you turd, yes he WAS referring to business and in particular to the immediate antecedent noun “a business”.

Whereas if Obama had actually intended to refer to roads and bridges and ignore the general antecedent rule with pronouns he would have said:

“Somebody invested in roads and bridges (plural, and in fact actually two plurals). If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build THOSE. Somebody else made THOSE happen.”

Which he didn’t say. Because he’s a communist among other reasons.  Just as conservatives have been trying to tell the nation for the last four years as it has circled the drain due to Obama’s failed socialist policies.

Or another way to express it in Obama speak: “All the Obamas and all of the liberals in the world is stupid.”  Because they are literally trying to “fundamentally transform” the English language along with America in order to explain away Obama’s Marxist Freudian slip.

The Washington Post points out that Obama’s words are right in line with what he’s been saying all along:

Here’s the entire quote:

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.”

His words this time were a little stronger (or perhaps impolitic), but he’s said basically the same thing before.

From June: “Yes, there have been fierce arguments throughout our history between both parties about the exact size and role of government — some honest disagreements. But in the decades after World War II, there was a general consensus that the market couldn’t solve all of our problems on its own.”

From his January State of the Union Address: “… Even my Republican friends who complain the most about government spending have supported federally financed roads and clean energy projects and federal offices for the folks back home. The point is, we should all want a smarter, more effective government.”

From 2009, before his stimulus package passed: “Only government can break the vicious cycles that are crippling our economy, where a lack of spending leads to lost jobs which leads to even less spending.”

So, whether you want to talk about English grammar or whether you want to talk about Obama’s own history and his own policies, he said what he said and he meant what he said.

“If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that.  Somebody else made that happen.”

I have also pointed out that all the things Obama referred to minimize the role that business owners play in their own success while maximizing the role that Government plays in their success – public schools and public school teachers, public roads, government loans and the Internet – were ALL used by mass murderer James Holmes.  And yet I don’t hear Obama claiming the credit for Holmes’ success as a murderous psycho for using public schools, public roads, government grants and the Internet the way he’s claiming credit for small business owners’ success.

If Government Was Responsible For Jack Gilchrist’s Success In Business, Then Government Is EQUALLY Responsible For James Holmes’ Mass Murder Spree

July 25, 2012

I’ve written a couple of articles that have featured Obama’s idiotic worldview summed up by “If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that” remark.  And I’ve received quite a few comments from liberals pointing out that Obama is right.  Why?  Because Jack Gilchrist went to public school and even got a government education loan.

Well, okay.  Government is responsible for our success.

Mind you, Government is equally responsible for damn near every single murder, every single rape, every single gang banging criminal, heck, every single criminal of every stripe, every single scumbag and every single slimeball in America.

Let’s take James Holmes.  Did you know that James Holmes went to a public school?

CASTROVILLE — Adam Martinez and Chris Elkins, Castroville Elementary School classmates of accused Colorado shooter James Holmes, were in shock over the weekend, unable to reconcile their childhood memories of a young man they both agreed was “an exemplary person — he never gave any trouble, and never got in trouble himself.”

Did you know that James Holmes received a government grant for his PhD studies?

James Holmes, the suspect in the Dark Knight Rises shooting rampage at an Aurora, Colorado, movie theater that killed 12 people and wounded 58 others, received a prestigious taxpayer-funded stipend from the National Institutes of Health that covered his graduate school tuition.

The federal government education grant that James Holmes received totaled $26,000 and “paid his tuition for the highly competitive neuroscience program at the University of Colorado in Denver,” reports CBS News.

I know this is getting pretty creepy, but did you know James Holmes actually drove on public roads?  Did you know that he even used a public road to get to his kill zone the night of his murder spree?

Ready to strike, on Thursday evening Holmes drove the five miles from his home next to the faculty complex to the multi-screen Century 16 cinema in a sprawling shopping mall.
 
There he bought a ticket for the midnight screening of Dark Knight Rises, the new Batman film, went into the auditorium with other excited cinema-goers, but slipped straight out the back into the car park though the emergency exit, leaving the door lodged slightly ajar.
 
Holmes changed into his body-armour and moved back into the cinema to launch his real-life rampage just as a cacophonous shooting scene erupted on the screen.

Oh, my gosh, I just thought of something that completes the picture: I’ll bet you anything you want to bet me that James Holmes used the internet.

Horrors, I was right:

Colorado shooting suspect James Holmes bought his 6,000-round arsenal legally and easily over the Internet, police said as Holmes was to appear in court Monday.

Holmes, 24, accused of killing 12 people and injuring 58 others inside an Aurora, Colo., movie theater Friday, ordered 3,000 rounds of handgun ammunition, 3,000 rounds for an assault rifle and 350 shells for a 12-gauge shotgun almost as easily as a person orders a book from Amazon.com, police told The New York Times.

He spent an estimated $3,000 at the online sites in the four months before the shooting, police told the newspaper.

My God.  Obama killed those people.  Just as surely as Obama took credit for successful business owners like Jack Gilchrist!!!!

What did Obama say in claiming that Government was responsible for the success of business owners who therefore ought to render unto Obama more in taxes?

There are a lot of wealthy, successful Americans who agree with me — because they want to give something back. They know they didn’t — look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there. (Applause.)

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn’t get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet.

The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together. There are some things, just like fighting fires, we don’t do on our own. I mean, imagine if everybody had their own fire service. That would be a hard way to organize fighting fires.

So we say to ourselves, ever since the founding of this country, you know what, there are some things we do better together. That’s how we funded the GI Bill. That’s how we created the middle class. That’s how we built the Golden Gate Bridge or the Hoover Dam. That’s how we invented the Internet. That’s how we sent a man to the moon. We rise or fall together as one nation and as one people, and that’s the reason I’m running for President — because I still believe in that idea. You’re not on your own, we’re in this together. (Applause.)

It’s all there.  Public schools, check.  Roads, check.  Government education programs, check.  The Internet, check.

Let’s replay fellow liberal Democrat ideologue Elizabeth Warren (when she’s not being a fake American Indian to dishonestly benefit from the politically correct racist point system of liberalism) to see how she dovetails with Obama:

“I hear all this, you know, ‘Well, this is class warfare, this is whatever,’” Warren said. “No. There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody.

“You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: you moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for; you hired workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did.”

Let me rewrite this to describe James Holmes:

“I hear all this, you know, ‘Well, this is anti-human warfare, this is whatever,’” Warren said. “No. There is nobody in this country who got to be a mass murdering psycho on his own. Nobody.

“You built a ‘house bomb’ out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: you moved your guns and your ammunition and your explosives and your murder suit to the movie theater on the roads the rest of us paid for; you bought your homicide supplies from workers the rest of us paid to educate; you were safe in your ‘house bomb’ because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn’t have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize all of your guns and ammunition and bombs and your death suit, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did.”

Notice that my modified version of Elizabeth Warren’s – as idiotic as it sounds – is every bit as true as the original idiot Warren version???

Barack Obama and the Democrat Party – the same people who are trying to take credit for the success of business owners – are every bit as responsible for James Holmes and every single murdering psycho and every single rapist and every single criminal, etc., etc., etc. as they are for those business owners.  Because all these slimbags and many others benefitted from those public schools, those public roads, those government loans, the internet and the police and fire departments just as much as business owners like Jack Gilchrist ever did.  That is simply a fact.

If you’re saying, “That’s crazy!”  Please understand that if the left is right about business owners, then precisely what I’m saying follows.  Because please find me the murder, rapist, gangbanger, child molester, etc. etc. etc. etc., who never went to a public school, or who never used a public road or bridge, or who never got any kind of government loan or grant, or who never used the internet and I could show you ten thousand who DID.

What the left is trying to claim to justify their messiah Obama is not merely wrong; it is flat-out demonic.

The left is bombarding the airwaves and the blogosphere with claims that business people owe their success to the government.  Why?  Because after all the government gave them education or assistance and built roads and the internet for them.  But by their very “logic” that liberals are claiming credit for every success, they are EVERY BIT AS RESPONSIBLE for every evil thing under the sun.  Because the same stuff that Obama is claiming credit for that gave us successful business owners such as Jack Gilchrist IS THE SAME DAMN STUFF that James Holmes used.

One liberal gave me a link that had the following:

After-all, it is government , we the people, that built the roads, airports, water plants, Internet, and other infrastructure businesses are dependent on. Taxpayers, we the people via teachers and other professions provided the knowledge that allowed the entrepreneur to innovate. […]

After-all, it is government , we the people, that built the roads, airports, water plants, Internet, and other infrastructure businesses are dependent on. Taxpayers, we the people via teachers and other professions provided the knowledge that allowed the entrepreneur to innovate.

The video is a highly edited version of Jack Gilchrist admitting what every single homo sapiens on the planet would acknowledge.  And yet the left cites it as if it’s some kind of giant admission.  Yes, dumbass, I know that.  I also know that James Holmes got the same things.  Please claim him, too.

The next liberal then says:

If you see the unedited remarks the president made and not the edited version Faux news showed you will see what the president was talking about and it was not building your buisiness it was the infrastructure to get your buisiness going like the roads which someone else built, the internet, schools etc.

Yes, stupid, we understand.  The same roads, the same internet, the same schools that James Holmes got.  [Feel free to notice that this idiot is claiming credit for the success of businesses while not even being capable of spelling the word “business” correctly].

After a couple of liberals who decided simple personal attacks was the way to go, the next lefty offered this:

Not only did Obama say that businesses had help from many along the way, and that they didn’t build the roads and bridges, etc. that businesses need in order to function, but Romney agreed with him. Yet Romney still chose to edit Obama’s remarks to make it look as though a business owner didn’t build his own business. And as it turns out, Jack Gilchrist most definitely benefited from government help, receiving millions in government loans and contracts.

Yes, yes, dumbass, Romney knows that the government has built some stuff.  And he probably also knows that James Holmes used it all along the way to being a mass murdering zombie.  Please credit the government for the killings.

And again the liberals who had nothing more than personal attacks, we have this:

1. YOUR parents sent you to public school. If you have a problem with that blame YOUR PARENTS.

2. The fact remains that unless you are independentely weathly like say,.. Mitt Romney you will at some point need help opening your business. Loans from the bank are guaranteed by…(shocker I know) THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

Jack Gilchrists dad may have put taken out a second mortagage on his house, but that doesn’t change the fact that he may have ALSO gotten a loan from the government.

And the last one I got:

Michael, so what do you have to say now that it’s been shown he DIDN’T do it on his own but with some government loans? Hypocrite is as hypocrite does.

And, okay.  As I documented, liberals should proudly embrace James Holmes and say, “What a wonderful product of all the stuff we’re claiming credit for.”  Public school, check.  Public road, check.  Internet, check.  GIANT GRANT FROM GOVERNMENT, CHECK.  Go down that list again.  We have the Democrat Party to thank for every mass murderer, every rapist, every pedophile, every gang banger, every criminal, every slimebag.  Every vile insect that preys upon American society got to where they are because of big government.  And that is according to the very same argument that liberals are using to argue that business owners got to where they are because of big government.

Let me go back to James Holmes.  I heard Greg Gutfeld make a funny but true comment about the insanity defense and how contrived it is.  Gutfeld said that it’s funny, but the murderers who claim they’re insane after their crimes somehow never claimed insanity for anything GOOD they did.  And that’s exactly how liberalism is: they have a religious view of the Government that makes it only responsible for everything GOOD.  And they will NEVER own up to anything bad unless they can say, “Bush did it.”  When you’re talking to liberals, you are talking to insane, pathological people who simply cannot think outside of their disturbed, warped, diseased little brains.

So, here’s the deal.  If a liberal says, “The government gave us schools,” YOU say, “James Holmes went to a public school.  Obama’s a murderer.”

If a liberal says, “The government gave us roads,” YOU say, “James Holmes used public roads to kill people.  Obama is a murderer.”

If a liberal says, “The government gives us loans and grants,” YOU say, “James Holmes got government grants and used the money to buy his arsenal.  Obama is a murderer.”

If a liberal says, “The government gave us the internet,” YOU say, “James Holmes used the internet to buy his arsenal.  Obama is a murderer.”

It’s that simple.  It’s a matter of using “idiot judo” to use the sheer stupidity of Democrats against them.

What the hell happened to this country?  How did business owners become successful?  I’ll tell you: they were successful because they studied harder, and worked harder, and took risks to make their dreams come true, and displayed personal responsibility for themselves, and took personal initiative for their own lives, and made good decisions, and practiced fiscal responsibility, and basically did everything that the Democrat Party is trying to destroy today.  Democrats want to tax the success of successful business owners and redistribute the fruits of that success so they can dole it out to failures to reward failure and ultimately so they can buy the votes of failures.

The Democrat Party has just taken stupid to an entirely new level.  The Democrat machine has become like a giant reciprocating engine of moral idiocy that just keeps getting dumber and dumber and dumber with every downward stroke and particularly with every single speech from Obama.

‘Assault Weapons,’ Gun Control And The Myth Of Which Side Is To Blame For ‘Guns In The Hands Of Killers’

July 24, 2012

I am home following an argument with a liberal dumbass for whom idiot opinion trumps facts.

I heard a man state that James Holmes was using a fully automatic assault rifle to mow people down.  And, being me, I was compelled to correct his errors with facts.

“Based on the records we have reviewed, personnel in our Denver store correctly and fully followed all Federal requirements with respect to the sale of one shotgun and one handgun to the individual identified in this incident,” said a statement released by Bass Pro Shops. “Background checks, as required by Federal law, were properly conducted, and he was approved.”

Holmes purchased a third weapon, a semi-automatic AR-15 assault rifle, at the Gander Mountain store in Aurora just a mile from the movie theater where he allegedly mowed down dozens of unsuspecting moviegoers.

That, too, was bought over the counter, after Holmes passed a background check.

“In 95 percent of all gun-related crimes, the guns are bought illegally, not over the counter,” said Richard Taylor, a manager at The Firing Line, a gun retailer in Aurora. “This appears to be the rare exception.”

According to Taylor, all three of the weapons are commonly sold over the counter; the shotgun, a favorite of those looking to protect their home; the AR-15, a weapon used by small game hunters and shooting enthusiasts; and the glock perhaps the most commonly-used gun by law enforcement officers on the street.

James Holmes did NOT use a fully automatic assault rifle in his July 20 murder spree; he used a civilian version of the M-16 called an AR-15 that fired in one mode: semi-automatic.

The definition of an “assault rifle” is a weapon that is capable of selective fire, with two modes: semi-automatic and full automatic.  The latest military assault rifles that have appeared have modified the “full automatic” to a shorter 3-round burst with each squeeze of the trigger.  That modification was the result of trying to save bullets, not lives, for the record.

Years back, Democrats used a sleight of hand to refer to “assault weapons” and demonize them.  These “assault weapons” are merely semi-automatic versions of the military grade weapons.  Since then, both the Democrat Party and the mainstream media have repeatedly and deliberately attempted to confuse the public into believing that “assault weapons” are dangerous fully automatic weapons that no one ought to be allowed to have.

Which is another way of pointing out that in a way, the liberal jackass who refused to be corrected with the facts wasn’t completely to blame for his being a dumb ass; the media and the Democrat Party routinely and deliberately confuse people with the intent of ginning up manufactured outrage in order to ban weapons under false pretenses.

There are still plenty of damn liberals who want to demonize Republicans over every gun crime.  Oh yes there are.  And I’m sick of it.

I’m just a guy who starts getting increasingly pissed off whenever I hear somebody selling lies in place of the facts.

The biggest lie of all that liberals and Democrats routinely tell is that the 2nd Amendment doesn’t really give the people the uninfringed right to keep and bear arms.

The 2nd Amendment – and it’s “second” only after the right to free speech and the right to worship in a free society – is short, sweet and crystal clear:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

If “the people” means “a well regulated Militia,” as liberals and Democrats routinely assert, then “the people” do not have any rights at all UNLESS THEY SERVE IN A WELL REGULATED MILITIA.  In other words, according to the “logic” of liberalism, you do NOT have the right to keep and bear arms; neither do you have the right to free speech, nor the right to worship as you choose, nor the right to peaceably assemble, etc. etc. ad nasuem.  You do not have any rights at all if you don’t have the right to keep and bear arms.  Because “the people” are either “the people” or they are “a well regulated militia.”  One or the other.

But let’s, just for the sake or argument, pretend for a moment that liberals and Democrats are honest people who truly want to follow the Constitution.  And they are honest for thinking of “the people” as “a well regulated militia.”  That would mean that Democrats and liberals are all for “well regulated militias,” right?

Well, the fact of the matter is that Democrats and liberals are NOT for guns.  Period.  And so they’ve gone after militias as savagely as they’ve gone after individual people being able to own guns.  You see, if you love the Constitution and you hate government regulations, well, you’re an “extremist militia” by Obama’s Homeland Security Department definition and Democrats and liberals are going to do all they can do to come after you.

So Democrats and liberals are dishonest.  They say “the people” shouldn’t have the right to be armed because only a militia should have that right.  And then they tell the militias that THEY shouldn’t have that right, either.

That’s how the Nazis  and the communists were.  They took away “the people’s” right to be armed, too.  It was the very first thing they did.  If they hadn’t, quite frankly, there would have been a lot fewer murdered Jews and a lot more dead Nazi killers.  I think the state of Israel has amply demonstrated that armed Jews are more than capable of protecting themselves when liberal policies had them as helpless sheep waiting for their turn to be slaughtered.  Just saying.

If you read the Federalist Papers there is no question whatsoever that the founding fathers viewed the 2nd Amendment as a reaction against tyranny.  In the Britain that the first Americans had escaped, it was a crime to own a weapon.  There was no way to rise up and thow off whatever shackles of tyranny that government imposed upon them.  The founding fathers said that people should not fear their governments; governments should fear their people.  And an armed government has no need to fear a disarmed people.

I think there are ALL KINDS of things that American society can do to better regulate gun ownership.

But I just as firmly believe that there should be NO regulations of ANY kind until Democrats stop being fascists and fundamentally respect the Constitution and specifically the 2nd Amendment.  Until the Democrat Party IN ITS PLATFORM fundamentally swears to uphold the fight of the people to keep and bear arms without infringement, there can and should be no negotiations of any kind to limit guns in any way.  Because such negotiations would amount to a zero-sum game in which conservatives keep on giving up ground and rights and Democrats keep seizing ground and rights.

These are the first two “gun laws” that we need in America:

1) Any politician (ie., any Democrat) who publicly says that people do not have a right to keep and bear arms will be denied ANY and ALL money by his or her political party.  He or she will likewise be stripped of any and all leadership in the party.

2) Any judge – whether elected or appointed – who affirms that the people do not have a fundamental right to keep and bear arms will be immediately removed from his or her position on the grounds that they violated the Constitution which they took an oath to uphold.

We get those two “gun laws” passed, and I am very open to requiring more responsibility and more regulation of gun ownership.  But until then, we shouldn’t give those fascist Democrats who want to take away our guns so that we are as helpless as the Jews were before the Nazis one damn thing.

I will not allow my rights to be taken away or limited in any way, shape or form by any political body that has so much as ONE politician who is allowed to think, “That’s step ONE toward my goal to take away their guns.”  I will not agree with Democrats regarding ANY limitation of my fundamental right to keep and bear arms when it is a matter of public record that many Democrats do not respect the Constitution they took an oath to uphold.

If you want to come here and assert that Republicans are creating a climate of violence by refusing to limit guns, you’ve come to the wrong place.  Because YOU are the reason why we can’t have more gun control.  Because it is your unconstitutional and frankly treasonous determination to take away the people’s right to keep and bear arms that is the REAL reason we can’t come to an accord on smarter gun regulation.

As we speak, the Obama regime is attempting to take our guns away with the power of the United Nations.  Until you Democrats get this demonic turd out of the White House, don’t you DARE try to touch my right to my guns.  And don’t you DARE try to demonize me for fighting to protect the very Bill of Rights and Constitution that YOU are trying to take away.  Because I’m the one who will demonize YOU.

I’ll leave you with two facts.

Fact one: Crime rates in liberal cities shockingly higher than in conservative cities

Fact two: Gun Control Makes Cities Dangerous Places to Live

Update: here’s another interesting fact: gun sales are skyrocketing after the Aurora massacre (see also here).  And many people are buying “assualt weapons” before any possible ban or regulation limits them.  And this isn’t the first time people have bought assault weapons out of fear of the left.  So people are literally buying guns out of fear of liberals while liberals blame conservatives for all the damn guns.

ABC News Falsely Blames Tea Party For Aurora, CO Shooting; Left Falsely Blames Rush Limbaugh.

July 20, 2012

ABC News once again documented how biased and prepared to immediately blame the Tea Party for whatever nut happens to come along and shoot a bunch of people.  They were wrong.  And you have to wonder what would have happened had Fox News wrongly demonized a minority the way ABC did in coming up with the wrong “James Holmes” as well as the wrong political affiliation.  The mainstream media was just as quick to demonize conservatives when Jared Loughner shot Gabrielle Giffords and killed several people.  And, you guessed it, they were wrong, too.  Because if anything the whackjob a.k.a. Jared Loughner was a Bush-hating liberal.  And then a Democrat who had actually been wounded at the shooting documented which side was really the violent side by issuing a death-threat against a Tea Party spokesman.

The one thing – the ONLY thing – that the left truly does well is blame and demonize. 

These people don’t need “facts.”  They can just make them up as they go along:

Left blames Aurora shooting on Rush Limbaugh
Posted at 9:11 am on July 20, 2012 by Twitchy Staff

de Groot@punchdouble

I wonder if the Aurora shooting has anything to do with Rush Limbaugh’s comments on TDKR. I surely wouldn’t be surprised.

Some Twitter users are speculating that the Aurora, Colo., shooter was inspired by comments made by Rush Limbaugh. The shooting occurred at a midnight premiere of the movie, “The Dark Knight Rises.” On Tuesday July 17, Limbaugh said on his radio show that the name of the villain in the movie is a thinly-veiled dig at Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney:

RUSH: Have you heard this new movie, the Batman movie, what is it, The Dark Knight Lights Up or whatever the name is. That’s right, Dark Knight Rises. Lights Up, same thing. Do you know the name of the villain in this movie? Bane. The villain in The Dark Knight Rises is named Bane, B-a-n-e. What is the name of the venture capital firm that Romney ran and around which there’s now this make-believe controversy? Bain. The movie has been in the works for a long time. The release date’s been known, summer 2012 for a long time. Do you think that it is accidental that the name of the really vicious fire breathing four eyed whatever it is villain in this movie is named Bane?

Prayers with the families of all the dead and wounded in Aurora, Colorado. Rush Limbaugh, you are an evil man.

Hannity beck limbaugh paraphernalia Found at aurora shooters home

Just got to see #Aurora. Is this connected to Limbaugh?—
Michelle (@mbchampagne) July 20, 2012

@GlobalGrind: BREAKING NEWS: We Pray! 14 Dead And 50 Wounded At Denver Movie Theater… bit.ly/OBXjPs“Rush Limbaugh connection?

14 killed, 50 injured in Colorado theater: A gunman opened fire early today at a screening of the new B… erict.co/MNYUOb via @CNN

 
 

.@EricTTung Wondering about a connection between Rush Limbaugh’s Dark Knight Bane Diatribe & the Horrific Aurora Theater Shooting This AM

Makes you wonder if Rush Limbaugh’s Batman conspiracy against Bain Capital has anything to do w/ the Aurora shooting?

so very sad. I wonder what Rush Limbaugh will say today, considering how he incited hatred against the film fb.me/234b2nLam

I’m curious to know if this was triggered by Rush Limbaugh’s insanity. Heartbreaking. usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/07/…

But it was Democrats — not Limbaugh — who first linked the “Dark Knight Rises” villain to Romney. This is from an article in The Washington Examiner published Monday July 16, the day before Limbaugh’s comments:

This summer’s much-anticipated Hollywood blockbuster, “The Dark Knight Rises,” is getting an unusual boost from Democrats and other foes of Mitt Romney who are eager to tie the Gotham crushing villain to the GOP presidential candidate. Their angle: the mask-wearing, “Venom” gas breathing bad guy has a name that sounds just like Romney’s former investment firm that President Obama has been blasting as a jobs killer.

“Bane” is the terrorist in the new movie who drives the caped crusader out of semi-retirement in the final Batman movie. Democrats, who believe they have Romney on the ropes over the president’s assault on his leadership at Bain Capital, said the comparisons are too rich to ignore.

“It has been observed that movies can reflect the national mood,” said Democratic advisor and former Clinton aide Christopher Lehane. “Whether it is spelled Bain and being put out by the Obama campaign or Bane and being out by Hollywood, the narratives are similar: a highly intelligent villain with offshore interests and a past both are seeking to cover up who had a powerful father and is set on pillaging society,” he added.

The left says that we need to take a day off from the political divide in honor of the Aurora tragedy – even as they drag politics into the tragedy in Aurora by turning the day into an “Let’s overturn the 2nd Amendment and ban guns” issue.  It doesn’t seem to matter that the most violent cities in America are ALL liberal cities with the most stringent gun laws.

Of course the left did the same thing during the Gabrielle Giffords shooting period.

You’d think at some point they would finally get tired of being wrong.  But nope; being wrong seems to energize them into even greater feats of being completely wrong.